I am going to use this, because I don't feel like reviewing.JamesSend a noteboard - 14/02/2012 06:44:08 AM

I read the book a few weeks back and feel as though I have no read it closely enough to provide a review that I would be happy with. I plan to reread the book fairly soon, but until then I will stick to sharing a few thoughts on the matter instead of delving deeply.Your two questions are perfect for this.

1. Did you enjoy this novel?

I did enjoy this novel, but there were a few things that bothered me:

1) Switching between characters happens so often that just when I am starting to get attached to one character's story, we end up moving on to the other. This makes it harder to become attached to a character because I am not only abandoning a character mid-stride, but I will be anticipating the continuation of the story while reading through the other character's chapter, making it difficult to care for that character. This was one of my complaints with China Mieville's Embassytown, though that came around to bite me in the ass when, upon demanding to the book that it choose a narrative instead of jumping back and forth in the timeline, it chose the one I was less interested in.

2) I feel as though the book has dated itself. The parts of the book set in the present day are rooted to our time by references to world events and politics. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but I wonder about the relevance of some of these references in the coming years, especially to younger readers. I have to reread though and take note of some of these things, as the book is no longer fresh in my mind and I am becoming slightly confused as to what appears (I seem to recall mention of bendy buses being decommissioned, which already holds little relevance to the US market now... at least for those who do not watch Top Gear).

2. How does this novel compare to the first? Does it live up to expectations?

Even having read it three times, I still love The Gone-Away World. I still fight to come up with anything negative to say about it. Even without the minor issues I have with the book, Angelmaker would have a difficult time living up to its predecessor. If I hadn't read TGAW again a month ago, I'd be willing to consider my praise and preference, the bulk of it, the product of nostalgia. Instead, there is just a deep and abiding love for the book. Try as it might, and as much as I would like it to, Angelmaker does not live up to it.

It is difficult to compare the two books because they are so different from one another. Anglemaker is written in the third person perspective, features multiple point of views, and even when the book relies on the flashback, the staple of TGAW, it threads them throughout the narrative instead of leaving them in large chunks. And where I am forced to describe to TGAW as "fucking nuts" in regard to its brand of crazy and the sheer amount of it, I would go so far as to say that Angelmaker is more subdued this time around. The crazy is there, but it is less in your face.

I'd write more, but I was supposed to have been asleep forty minutes ago. Maybe tomo... later today.

Reply to Message

The text and structure of these pages are copyrighted by Ben Murdoch-Smith. The design is used with permission from Mike Mackert.
All references to published material are copyrighted by their respective authors.